alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6077 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6077

     Recognizing the National Comedy Center in Jamestown, New York.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 12, 2018

   Mr. Reed introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     Recognizing the National Comedy Center in Jamestown, New York.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Comedy Center Recognition 
Act''.

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL COMEDY CENTER IN JAMESTOWN, NEW YORK.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
            (1) The National Comedy Center is the first nonprofit 
        cultural institution and national-scale visitor experience 
        dedicated to comedy. Featuring more than 50 immersive exhibits, 
        the Center celebrates comedy in all of its forms, educating and 
        engendering in visitors an appreciation for the art form and 
        its artists.
            (2) The National Comedy Center is a nonprofit entity that 
        plays host to the annual Lucille Ball Comedy Festival, 
        attracting comedic acts nationwide. Jamestown is the birthplace 
        of internationally recognized comedienne Lucille Ball of ``I 
        Love Lucy'' fame.
            (3) The United States currently lacks a national center 
        dedicated to comedy and the role it plays in American culture.
            (4) The Center celebrates comedy and seeks to inspire a new 
        generation of cultural appreciation for the comedic arts.
    (b) Congressional Recognition.--Congress--
            (1) recognizes that the National Comedy Center, located in 
        Jamestown, New York, is the only museum of its kind that exists 
        for the exclusive purpose of celebrating comedy in all its 
        forms; and
            (2) officially designates the National Comedy Center as the 
        National Comedy Center.
    (c) Effect of Recognition.--The National Comedy Center recognized 
in this section is not a unit of the National Park System, and the 
designation shall not be construed to require or permit Federal funds 
to be expended for any purpose related to the center.
                                 <all>
```
ANTHONY R. BAKER JR. , Appellant,

v. STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
CASE NO. 1D 17

- 0603

___ __________________________/ Opinion filed September 27, 2017. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Steven B. Whittington , Judge

. Anthony R. Baker Jr., pro se , Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PE R CURIAM. Upon consideration of appellant’s response to the Court’s order of June 9, 2017, the Court has determined that the Order Denying Defendant’s Motions to Dismiss is not an appealable order. Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b). Therefore, the Court lacks appe llate jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Court declines appellant’s request to review the order by petition for writ of certiorari because appellant has failed to2 demonstrate that the ruling results in harm that cannot be remedied on appeal from a final judgme nt. Cf. Callins v. State , 747 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and ROWE, J J

. , CONCUR.
Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Francis A. Rebello, certify to the best of my knowledge based upon a review
of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of H & H Imports, Inc. for the quarter
ended November 30, 2008 (the "Form 10-Q"), that the Form 10-Q fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and that information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of H &
H Imports, Inc. for the period covered by the Form 10-Q.


Date: January 5, 2009                   By: /s/ Francis A. Rebello
                                            ----------------------
                                        Francis A. Rebello, President
                                        (Principal Executive and Financial
                                        and Accounting Officer)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Legal Services Corporation

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

*Contact Person for Further Information:*                         Patricia Batie, Manager of Board Operations, at (202) 295-1500.                    

*Special Needs:*                         Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in alternate formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to attend the meeting may notify Patricia Batie at (202) 295-1500.                     

February 13, 2008.

Victor M. Fortuno,

Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 08-758 Filed 2-13-08; 4:55 pm]

BILLING CODE 7050-01-M
AMENDMENT
TO PROMISSORY NOTE


 


WHEREAS,
American Boarding Company, a Delaware corporation, (“Maker”) has issued that certain Promissory Note to Narguesse
Nourkeyhani in the principal amount of $12,000 on May 22, 2014 (the “Note”),


NOW,
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:


	All
provisions set forth in the Note providing that any amounts due under the Note are convertible to capital stock of the Maker are
hereby deleted. The Note shall not be convertible to common stock, or any other class of capital stock, of the Maker.
	All
other terms of the Note not specifically modified by this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect.



 


/s/
Narguesse Nourkeyhani


Narguesse
Nourkeyhani


American
Board Company


 


By:
/s/ Reza Noorkayhani


Reza
Noorkayhani, President and CEO
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,918
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   73,282
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,259)
<INVENTORY>                                     61,666
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               175,309
<PP&E>                                          89,468
<DEPRECIATION>                                (34,103)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 563,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           90,225
<BONDS>                                        415,419
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        98,503
<OTHER-SE>                                    (59,556)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   563,106
<SALES>                                        359,077
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               359,077
<CGS>                                          188,340
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  188,340
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               139,550
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   400
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,123
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (8,928)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,900)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,028)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,028)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6632

LEWIS A. ROBINSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus D. A. BRAXTON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:06-cv-00655-GBL) Submitted: July 19, 2007 Decided: July 25, 2007 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lewis A. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Lewis A. Robinson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude Robinson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 November 25, 2013

p1118

Order 

Clerk

November 25, 2013

147720

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 147720

COA: 313572

Berrien CC: 2009-005695-FC

ANDRE JABREE MARSHALL,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 2, 2013 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

mtniteb ~tate11 QCourt of ~peaI11

for tbe jfeberaI QCircuit

ALEXANDER L. COOPER,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,

Respondent.

2012-3112

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection

Board in case no. NY0752110003-I-1.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Alexander L. Cooper's

submission of his Statement Concerning Discrimination

and the court's September 6,2012 order,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

(1) The mandate is recalled, the court's May 15, 2012

dismissal order is vacated, and the petition is reinstated.

(2) Cooper's motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis is granted.

(3) Cooper's informal brief is due within 21 days of

the date of filing ofthis order.

Case: 12-3112 Document: 10 Page: 1 Filed: 10/01/2012
ALEXANDER COOPER V. DVA

FOR THE COURT

2

OCT 01 2012

Date

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

cc: Alexander L. Cooper (informal briefform enclosed)

P. Davis Oliver, Esq.

s25

Case: 12-3112 Document: 10 Page: 2 Filed: 10/01/2012
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 02-4958

ANGELA WOODRUFF,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg.

William M. Catoe, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

(CR-98-1251)

Submitted: June 12, 2003

Decided: June 19, 2003

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL

David W. Plowden, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville,

South Carolina, for Appellant. David Calhoun Stephens, Assistant

United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Angela Woodruff appeals the revocation of the five-year term of

probation imposed after she pled guilty to illegal use of an electronic

benefit card. Woodruff’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), questioning whether the magistrate judge abused his discretion by revoking Woodruff’s probation

and sentencing her to nine months imprisonment. Counsel states,

however, that, in his view, there are no meritorious issues for appeal.

We affirm. 

We review the magistrate judge’s revocation of probation for an

abuse of discretion. Burns v. United States, 287 U.S. 216, 222-23

(1932). The proof required to support a revocation of probation is that

the court be "reasonably satisfied that a probationer has violated the

terms of his release." United States v. Cates, 402 F.2d 473, 474 (4th

Cir. 1968). Here, Woodruff admitted the charged violations of use of

cocaine, new criminal conduct, and failure to submit written reports.

Thus, we find that the revocation was supported by sufficient evidence. In addition, Woodruff’s sentence was within the properly calculated guideline range. 

As required by Anders, we have reviewed the entire record and

have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm the

magistrate judge’s judgment. The court requires that counsel inform

his client, in writing, of her right to petition the Supreme Court of the

United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition

be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous,

then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served

on the client. We dispense with oral argument, because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED

2 UNITED STATES v. WOODRUFF
Exhibit 10.14


 


Share Exchange Agreement


 


Transferor (Party A): HEBRON TECHNOLOGY
CO., LTD.


 


Transferee (Party B): HONGKONG XIBOLUN
TECHNOLOGY LIMITED


 


The registered capital of the Sino-foreign
joint venture Wenzhou Xibolun Automation Project Technology Co., Ltd. is RMB 3,000,000. Zhejiang Xibolun Technology Co., Ltd. contributed
capital of RMB 300,000, 10% of the registered capital. Wenzhou Xibolun Fluid Equipment Co., Limited contributed capital of RMB
300,000, 10% of the registered capital. HEBRON TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. contributed RMB 2,400,000, 80% of the registered capital. Currently
because HEBRON TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. intends to focus on other areas, with consent of the other two investors, it decides to transfer
all of its shares in the joint venture to HONGKONG XIBOLUN TECHNOLOGY LIMITED.


 


		I.	Parties’ Names and Addresses:



 


Party A: HEBRON TECHNOLOGY CO.,
LTD.


 


Legal Address: P.O. Box 957, Offshore
Incorporations Centre, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands


 


License Number: 174571


 


Contact Phone Number: 00886939921812


 


Party B: HONGKONG XIBOLUN TECHNOLOGY
LIMITED


 


License Number: 1615940


 


Legal Address: Room 1003, 10/F,
Witty Commercial Bldg, 1A-1L Tung Choi St, Mong Kok, Hong Kong


 


Phone Number: 13758822773


 


		II.	Share Transferred and Consideration: Party A transfers 80% of shares in Wenzhou Xibolun Automation
Project Technology Co., Ltd. with paid-in capital of zero to Party B without any consideration.



 


		III.	Rights and Obligations: On the day when the share transfer is closed, all the rights and obligations
that Party A owns are transferred to Party B.



 


		IV.	Liability for Breach of Contract: If Party A does not transfer the right timely, it should compensate
all loss incurred.



 


		V.	Dispute resolution: For any dispute, Party A and Party B shall negotiate for settlement. If it
cannot be settled, either party can submit it to Longwan District Court for suit according to Contract Law of the People's Republic
of China.



 


		VI.	Agreement Execution and Termination: This agreement is effective after being approved by the original
approval authority. It is terminated after both parties perform it.



 


		VII.	This agreement is signed by the representatives of both parties at Wenzhou, China on October 30,
2012. It has 8 originals, with Party A and Party B each holding one copy, Wenzhou Xibolun Automation Project Technology Co., Ltd
holding one copy for record, and other being submitted to relevant authorities for record.



 




    	1



    	 



    

 


Party A: /s/ HEBRON TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.


 


Party B: /s/ HONGKONG XIBOLUN TECHNOLOGY LIMITED


 


2012-10-30


 



    	2
| |                          
| | -------------------------
| | Government ofSaskatchewan

---

NEWS RELEASE - OCTOBER 16, 2009

---

FINANCE MINISTER
ANNOUNCES $102 MILLION IN GOVERNMENT SAVINGS

The provincial government has
identified just under $102 million in savings through a government-wide cost restraint
exercise.In August following the release of the First Quarter Financial Report which
showed a decline in revenue, Finance Minister Rod Gantefoer announced government was
looking for a further $49.2 million in cost-saving measures in addition to deferrals for
$132 million in capital at First Quarter.

Gantefoer said he is pleased
government worked together to achieve the same goal and identify savings of double the
targeted amount. Ministries were able to pull together and identify even further
savings and efficiencies across government, Gantefoer said. Our intent was to
tread as lightly as possible on government programs and capital projects while achieving
our targets in spending restraints.

We were able to double our
original target without a significant impact on programs for Saskatchewan people.
Government first looked internally and located nearly $10 million in potential savings
through vacancy management initiatives and travel restrictions across the civil service.
Vacancy management will achieve savings equal to about 142 full-time equivalent positions
or about $8.4 million.

Just over $35 million is being
realized through additional capital deferrals. This includes $32.1 million returned from
the University of Saskatchewan for the Academic Health Sciences Building. Health has
deferred $3 million in capital through the ambulatory surgical care centre in Regina due
to slower than expected construction progress.

Various ministries were able to
locate another $48.4 million in program savings, where funding required for certain
programs was less than anticipated. For example, Agriculture provided $20.4 million in
program utilization savings and Environment was able to find $9 million in savings for
lower-than-expected forest fire fighting costs.

A further $8.1 million will be
realized through spending cuts or expense deferrals. This includes $5 million from Health
for non-clinical programs administered by the Regional Health Authorities. Our
government is committed to responsible financial management as Saskatchewan experiences a
decline in revenues, Gantefoer said. The volatility in commodity markets
 particularly potash  and the recent rise in the Canadian dollar continues to
create uncertainty for government revenues. We will move forward in a prudent and cautious
manner until we see a turnaround. Gantefoer added that while non-renewable resource
revenues have affected provincial revenues, Saskatchewans overall economy remains
strong compared to other provinces in Canada.

-30-

For more information, contact:

Vanessa Gooliaff
BeaupréFinanceReginaPhone: 306-787-8109 Email:
vanessa.beaupre@gov.sk.caCell: 306-526-6793

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED May 19, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-40501 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus DONTAE ROMAIN BROWN, also known as Dontae Romain Jimerson, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-106-10

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Dontae Romain Brown appeals his sentence following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base. Brown argues that his sentence was unreasonable in light of United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005), due to the disparity in the punishment imposed for offenses involving powder cocaine versus those involving cocaine base.No. 05-40501 -2- We note that Brown’s plea agreement contained a waiver of the right to appeal his sentence. The Government does not seek enforcement of the waiver, however, and we therefore do not consider it. See United States v. Lang, 440 F.3d 212, 213 (5th Cir. 2006). The district court imposed a sentence within the advisory guideline range, and Brown does not challenge the district court’s calculation of that range. Brown’s sentence is therefore presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo , 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Mares , 402 F.3d 511, 518-19 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). We have previously rejected arguments challenging the disparity in the penalties for offenses involving powder and crack cocaine, which are mandated by Congress. See , e.g. , United States v. Wilson , 77 F.3d 105, 112 (5th Cir. 1996). Because the advisory guidelines range should be determined in the same manner as before Booker , Mares , 402 F.3d at 519, Brown has not overcome the presumption that his sentence is reasonable, see Alonzo , 435 F.3d at 554;
Mares , 402 F.3d at 519.
AFFIRMED.